Mey Network Info
Mey Network is an integrated blockchain ecosystem designed to bridge the gap between physical assets and the digital world. By combining the power of Meychain—a dedicated Layer 1 blockchain for Real-World Assets (RWAs)—and MeyFi, our decentralized nance platform, Mey Network enables seamless tokenization, trading, and management of assets in a secure, scalable environment.
TrustNet Score
The TrustNet Score evaluates crypto projects based on audit results, security, KYC verification, and social media presence. This score offers a quick, transparent view of a project's credibility, helping users make informed decisions in the Web3 space.
Real-Time Threat Detection
Real-time threat detection, powered by Cyvers.io,
is currently not
activated
for this project.
This advanced feature provides continuous monitoring and instant alerts to safeguard your assets from potential security threats. Real-time detection enhances your project's security by proactively identifying and mitigating risks.
For more information, click here.
Security Assessments
Summary and Final Words
No crucial issues found
The contract does not contain issues of high or medium criticality. This means that no known vulnerabilities were found in the source code.
Contract owner cannot mint
It is not possible to mint new tokens.
Contract owner cannot blacklist addresses.
It is not possible to lock user funds by blacklisting addresses.
Contract owner cannot set high fees
The fees, if applicable, can be a maximum of 25% or lower. The contract can therefore not be locked. Please take a look in the comment section for more details.
Contract cannot be locked
Owner cannot lock any user funds.
Token cannot be burned
There is no burning within the contract without any allowances
Ownership is not renounced
The owner retains significant control, which could potentially be used to modify key contract parameters.
Scope of Work
This audit encompasses the evaluation of the files listed below, each verified with a SHA-1 Hash. The team referenced above has provided the necessary files for assessment.
The auditing process consists of the following systematic steps:
- Specification Review: Analyze the provided specifications, source code, and instructions to fully understand the smart contract's size, scope, and functionality.
- Manual Code Examination: Conduct a thorough line-by-line review of the source code to identify potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement.
- Specification Alignment: Ensure that the code accurately implements the provided specifications and intended functionalities.
- Test Coverage Assessment: Evaluate the extent and effectiveness of test cases in covering the codebase, identifying any gaps in testing.
- Symbolic Execution: Analyze the smart contract to determine how various inputs affect execution paths, identifying potential edge cases and vulnerabilities.
- Best Practices Evaluation: Assess the smart contracts against established industry and academic best practices to enhance efficiency, maintainability, and security.
- Actionable Recommendations: Provide detailed, specific, and actionable steps to secure and optimize the smart contracts.
A file with a different Hash has been intentionally or otherwise modified after the security review. A different Hash may indicate a changed condition or potential vulnerability that was not within the scope of this review.
Final Words
The following provides a concise summary of the audit report, accompanied by insightful comments from the auditor. This overview captures the key findings and observations, offering valuable context and clarity.
Ownership Privileges
- The owner can update the first release value in the contract.
- The owner can update the start time in the contract.
- The owner can add/remove users from the whitelisted users.
- The owner can update the whitelisted user amount to any arbitrary value.
- The owner can claim tokens and ETH from the contract.
- The owner can update the start time in the contract.
Note - This Audit report consists of a security analysis of the Mey Network smart contract. This analysis did not include functional testing (or unit testing) of the contract’s logic. Moreover, we only audited one token contract for the Mey Network team. Other contracts associated with the project were not audited by our team. We recommend investors do their own research before investing.
Files and details
Functions
public
/
State variables
public
/
Total lines
of code
/
Capabilities
Hover on items
/
Findings and Audit result
medium Issues | 2 findings
Pending
#1 medium Issue
Owner can drain tokens.
The owner of the contract is able to drain the complete balance of the contract by calling this function. This is no recommended as if the vested tokens is drained from the contract then the user will not be able to claim the tokens from the contract. It is recommended that there must be a check so that the vested tokens cannot get drained from the contract.
Pending
#2 medium Issue
Missing Non-reentrant check.
The contract contains the functionality in which the claim function (and similar functions like withdraw), makes an external call to transfer ERC20 tokens using the transfer function. Since the contract hasn't yet marked the claim as completed (i.e., updated the claimed variable), the attacker can exploit this to reenter the claim function, repeatedly withdrawing tokens. The transfer happens first (interaction with an external contract) before the internal state is updated. The non-reentrant modifier ensures that any attempts to call the claim function again during execution are blocked, providing an additional safeguard. Therefore, It is recommended to do the check-effect-transaction method or use the non-reentrant modifier to prevent the code from this issue.
low Issues | 2 findings
Pending
#1 low Issue
Missing Events.
Make sure to emit events for all the critical parameter changes in the contract to ensure the transparency and trackability of all the state variable changes.
Pending
#2 low Issue
Redundant code.
The contract contains the functionality in which the owner can update the start time in the contract where as this function is present twice in the contract which is not recommended as this can increase the gas cost in the contract. It is recommended to remove the redundant code from the contract.
informational Issues | 1 findings
Pending
#1 informational Issue
Contract doesn’t import packages from source (like OpenZeppelin etc.)
We recommend importing all packages from npm directly without flattening the contract. Functions could be modified or can be susceptible to vulnerabilities.